Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

cnbc.com

101–110 of 115 posts

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#101
post #73

Ah yes, the government mafia wants a bigger cut. A reminder: taxation is theft and slavery. The Crypto movement was created by people who recognize that.

A response completely bereft of any logical argument about why taxation is "theft and slavery". Do you have any arguments that would support this assertion?

I don't want to support foreign wars. I don't want to support foreign aid to countries that use it to conduct wars. I don't want to support incarceration. Yet, if I don't (e.g. pay taxes), I will be imprisoned, shot, etc.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#102

It's completely reasonable to tax investment earnings. That said, these regulations are concerning to me as a developer interested in actually building on blockchain technology. At least from what I understand, just doing what's rapidly becoming run of the mill Web3 development is becoming extremely fraught territory for US citizens who want to comply with accounting and tax rules. It's an even bigger deterrent for s…

Why can't you do run of the mill Web3 development without transferring >$10K ???

You need to pay gas fees to transfer/execute smart contracts.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A response completely bereft of any logical argument about why taxation is "theft and slavery". Do you have any arguments that would support this assertion?

I don't want to support foreign wars. I don't want to support foreign aid to countries that use it to conduct wars. I don't want to support incarceration. Yet, if I don't (e.g. pay taxes), I will be imprisoned, shot, etc.

Came here for this. It's sick to see how much energy and effort gets wasted on war and violence

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#104

It's completely reasonable to tax investment earnings. That said, these regulations are concerning to me as a developer interested in actually building on blockchain technology. At least from what I understand, just doing what's rapidly becoming run of the mill Web3 development is becoming extremely fraught territory for US citizens who want to comply with accounting and tax rules. It's an even bigger deterrent for s…

>It wouldn't have been good for the US to stifle the web 25 years ago Bitcoin was developed in 2008. The WWW opened to the general public in 1991. This would be the equivalent of the US government starting to regulate the web in 2004. Crypto enthusiasts like to pretend we're still in the early days to try and deal with the extremely embarrassing reality that almost a decade and a half on it's still utterly useless.

That's like saying webapps are useless because users go to the app store first.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing about all these amazing crypto products, yet outside of this very specific scene, where curiously only the VCs and devs involved wax poetic about it, you can never seem to find a real customer talking about their experience. You either acknowledge that cryptocurrencies look close enough to currencies or securities and regulate them as such, or you promote them for illegal and ambiguously legal reasons…

>"I keep hearing about all these amazing crypto products, yet outside of this very specific scene, where curiously only the VCs and devs involved wax poetic about it, you can never seem to find a real customer talking about their experience." because there is none. A paper[1] described this as 'Veblenian Entrepreneurship'. Being 'in crypto' isn't actually about producing any tangible goods or services, but consuming…

It is not everyday one encounters a Thorstein Veblen reference.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simplest is your electric bill should fully encompass the externalities of the electricity you use. No one is going to self report crypto mining.

We want poor people to still have things like refridgerators.

It’s a bit hard to disambiguate. What about a PS5, should the electricity for that be taxed higher?

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private organization (central bank) having a monopoly on printing and lending money to your government is acting "legitimately"? Many that have studied this system would disagree.

Where did you get the assertion that a central bank is a private organization? What evidence do you have for that?

UK and US both have private central banks. This is true for all G8 countries if I remember correctly.

Most income taxes collected in the US/UK go directly to these private organizations.

In many ways slavery in the US was 'abolished' in 1865 then a revised version (aka perpetual debt slavery) was adopted in 1913 at the tail end of the US-China opium trade induced economic boom and expanded by both parties in the decades that followed.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#108

This seems like a positive for the legitimization of cryptocurrency. Of course if you were trying to use it to avoid paying taxes you may feel otherwise. Hopefully it leads better forms and adoption by exchanges to provide useful tax documents.

If "Legitimate" means having to comply with all these regulations and decisions from unelected bureaucrats, then I prefer fringe and bizarre.

I always found the derogatory use of “unelected bureaucrats” hilarious. Who elected the btc core devs?

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#109
Big brother can be a good thing, could be welcomed, if big brother was good for the user. The way they talk about this is a one-way transfer of value from the blockchain to the treasury - in a time of massive fiscal reserve from bond purchases. They would get a stronger desire to pay taxes if they gave better investor protections. Right now, there are none. Zero. You get rich, you pay half. You lose your life savings to a hack or rug pull, you get a $3000 maximum deduction on zero income. If both happen, you still owe the first half, and you still get nothing for the second half. And nobody is going to help you get your money back. You can’t sue, you can’t do anything. The current rules make it easy to end up owing dollars you’ve never had, and this happens a lot.

The world of fiat is not perfect, but you pay taxes and you get the might of the US government behind your investments. Your assumptions of good faith can be backed up by jail time if you are deceived. There’s actually a choice about that. You could invest cash in illegal business that affords you no protection, but most people choose not to. Blockchain investments are crippled for US citizens on both ends, crime and taxes. The benefits of the open participation model are still compelling, just not as much.

It will take broad international standards on both crime and taxes to fix this, and get Americans onto even footing with the rest of the world. Right now, US citizens are at a disadvantage compared to world counterparts, unless you are big enough to set up a subsidiary in a ‘crypto-friendly’ tax country.

We tried this with the internet 30 years ago, but we did the opposite. The US was the most Internet-friendly country on earth. Regulators knew they were in a war for global market share. The result is unsurprising. We won. Everybody came here. China may have won mobile. There will be competition for crypto. Binance is currently homeless. All the biggest VC-backed projects were led by US residents that moved to Switzerland to avoid taxes, which is perfectly legal for them, but not for a US citizen. That tax advantage made them better investments. Being a US citizen is an investment liability. Apologies if this rubs you the wrong way, but, citizenship should be an advantage here, just as it is respectively everywhere else (maybe not China).

People should want to pay their taxes, right? They voted for it, right? It’s not that different from any business or charity, and if the cypherpunks are correct, there will come a time where one may freely choose which society to enjoy the befits and bear the costs of membership. It won’t be free, but it will have to compete on value. The treasury is acutely aware of this for big business already, and the solution is to make it more competitive on the backs of citizens. There’s no other way! The US budget is loaded with items marked ‘mandatory’ that taxpayers today will never see the benefit of. We all love the roads; don’t pull that canard. There are great honest values in paying for the common good. But those dollars mostly seem to end up on the balance sheets of the same companies that shift the burden onto citizens, and this system of value extraction is the entire reason why a little experimental protest called Bitcoin has any value at all. If the dollar had as much transparency as Bitcoin, you could see this happening in real time.

So please start your cryptocurrency regulation with actions that actually help people in this space. They want violent and exploitive criminals out. They want protection from hacks and rug pulls. They want secure asset custody. They want proven reserves. They want smart contract audits. Paying taxes could and should afford advantages well worth the cost. Think about it this way: if all agencies announced that they were going to stop all taxes and all contract enforcements for the equities market, what would happen? Absolute pandemonium. Zero liquidity. The biggest market crash in history over the next 10 minutes. Like all open source, the customers in crypto markets are building solutions to obviate those agencies out of necessity, not desire.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We want poor people to still have things like refridgerators.

It’s a bit hard to disambiguate. What about a PS5, should the electricity for that be taxed higher?

How this works in most areas is small amounts of electricity are subsidized and that subsidy goes away the more electricity you use.

Fridge, washing machine, A/C, tv, game console or such - you are probably not paying much.

Running a rack of gpus to mine the latest coin? Running a machine shop? Well, your cost is gonna start climbing.

Post reply on HN